Chapter 18.04 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SEPA)

The city of West Richland adopts the ordinance codified in this chapter under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.21C.120 and the SEPA rules WAC 197-11-904. The SEPA rules contained in Chapter 197-11 WAC must be used in conjunction with this chapter. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.015 Severability.

If any provision of this chapter or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this chapter, or the application of the provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019].

Article II. General Requirements

18.04.020 Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference:

WAC

197-11-040 Definitions.

197-11-050 Lead agency.

197-11-055 Timing of SEPA process.

197-11-060 Content of environmental review.

197-11-070 Limitations on actions during SEPA process.

197-11-080 Incomplete or unavailable information.

197-11-090 Supporting documents.

197-11-100 Information required of applicants.

197-11-158 GMA project review – Reliance on existing plans, laws, and regulations.

197-11-164 Planned actions – Definition and criteria.

197-11-168 Ordinances or resolutions designating planned actions – Procedures for adoption.

197-11-172 Planned actions – Project review.

197-11-210 SEPA/GMA integration.

197-11-220 SEPA/GMA definitions.

197-11-228 Overall integration procedures.

197-11-230 Timing of an integrated GMA/SEPA process.

197-11-232 Integration procedures for preliminary planning, environmental analysis and expanded scoping.

197-11-235 Integrating documents.

197-11-250 SEPA/Model Toxics Control Act integration.

197-11-253 SEPA lead agency for MTCA actions.

197-11-256 Preliminary evaluation.

197-11-259 Determination of nonsignificance for MTCA remedial action.

197-11-262 Determination of significance and EIS for MTCA remedial actions.

197-11-265 Early scoping for MTCA remedial actions.

197-11-268 MTCA interim actions.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.030 Additional definitions.

In addition to those definitions contained within WAC 197-11-700 through 197-11-799 and 197-11-220, when used in this chapter the following terms shall have the following meanings, unless the content indicates otherwise:

“Department” means any division, subdivision or organizational unit of the city established by ordinance, rule or order.

“DNS,” as listed in WAC 197-11-734, means determination of nonsignificance, whether with or without mitigation measures.

“Early notice” means the city’s response to an applicant stating whether it considers issuance of a determination of significance likely for the applicant’s proposal (mitigated determination of nonsignificance (DNS) procedures).

“Ordinance” means the ordinance, resolution, or other procedure used by the city to adopt regulatory requirements.

“SEPA rules” means Chapter 197-11 WAC adopted by the Department of Ecology. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.040 Designation of responsible official.

A. For those proposals for which the city is a lead agency, the responsible official shall be the community development director or such other person as the mayor may designate in writing.

B. For all proposals for which the city is a lead agency, the responsible official shall make the threshold determination, supervise scoping and preparation of any required environmental impact statement (EIS) and perform any other functions assigned to the lead agency or responsible official by those sections of the SEPA rules that were adopted by reference in WAC 173-806-020.

C. The city shall retain all documents required by the SEPA rules (Chapter 197-11 WAC) and make them available in accordance with Chapter 42.17 RCW. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article III. Lead Agency

18.04.050 Lead agency determination and responsibilities.

A. The responsible official or the department receiving an application for or initiating a proposal that involves a nonexempt action shall determine the lead agency for that proposal under WAC 197-11-050 and 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, unless the lead agency has been previously determined or the department is aware that another department or agency is in the process of determining the lead agency.

B. When the city is the lead agency for a proposal, the department receiving the application shall determine the responsible official who shall supervise compliance with the threshold determination requirements and, if an EIS is necessary, shall supervise preparation of the EIS.

C. When the city is not the lead agency for a proposal, all departments of the city shall use and consider as appropriate either the determination of nonsignificance (DNS) or the final EIS of the lead agency in making decisions on the proposal. No city department shall prepare or require preparation of a DNS or EIS in addition to that prepared by the lead agency unless the city determines a supplemental environmental review is necessary under WAC 197-11-600.

D. If the city or any department receives a lead agency determination made by another agency that appears inconsistent with criteria of WAC 197-11-253 or 197-11-922 through 197-11-940, it may object to the determination. Objection must be made to the agency originally making the determination and resolved within 14 days of receipt of determination or the city must petition the Department of Ecology for a lead agency determination under WAC 197-11-946 within the 14-day time period. Any such petition on behalf of the city may be initiated by the responsible official or any department.

E. The responsible official is authorized to make agreements as to lead agency status or shared lead agency’s duties for a proposal under WAC 197-11-942 and 197-11-944; provided, that the responsible official and any department that will incur responsibilities as the result of such agreement approve the agreement.

F. The responsible official shall require sufficient information from the applicant to identify other agencies with jurisdiction.

G. When the city is lead agency for a MTCA remedial action, the Department of Ecology shall be provided an opportunity under WAC 197-11-253(5) to review the environmental documents prior to public notice being provided. If the SEPA and MTCA documents are issued together with one public comment period under WAC 197-11-253(6), the city shall decide jointly with Ecology who receives the comment letters and how copies of the comment letters will be distributed to the other agency. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.060 Categorical exemptions and threshold determinations – Adoption by reference.¹

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference as supplemented in this chapter. The city shall identify whether an action is categorically exempt within seven days of receiving a completed application:

WAC

197-11-300 Purpose of this part.

197-11-310 Threshold determination required.

197-11-315 Environmental checklist.

197-11-330 Threshold determination process.

197-11-335 Additional information.

197-11-340 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-350 Mitigated DNS.

197-11-355 Optional DNS process.

197-11-360 Determination of significance (DS)/initiation of scoping.

197-11-390 Effect of threshold determination.

[Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.070 Categorical exemptions and threshold determinations – Time estimates.

The time estimates contained in this section apply when the city processes licenses for all private projects and those governmental proposals submitted to the city by other agencies. The actual time may vary with the complexity of the project, availability of staff, cooperation of agencies with jurisdiction or expertise, etc. The time estimates contained herein shall not be construed to be mandatory. When the stated time estimate would end on a weekend or official holiday, the time estimate shall extend to include the next day upon which the city’s administrative offices are open for business.

A. Categorical Exemptions. The city will normally identify whether an action is categorically exempt within 10 days of receiving a completed application.

B. Threshold Determinations.

1. The city will normally complete threshold determinations for proposals that can be based solely upon review of environmental checklist for a proposal within 14 days of the determination of a complete application in accordance with WRMC Title 14, but not more than 90 days after the determination of completeness.

2. When the responsible official requires further information from the applicant or consults with other agencies with jurisdiction:

a. The city will normally request such further information within 28 days of receiving an application;

b. The city will normally wait no longer than 15 days for a consulted agency to respond;

c. The responsible official shall issue a threshold determination at least 15 days prior to a public hearing on a proposal, if a public hearing is required. If a public hearing is not required, a threshold determination shall not be issued until the public comment period on a notice of application has expired.

3. When the city must initiate further studies, including field investigations, to obtain the information to make the threshold determination, the city will normally complete the studies within 30 days of receiving a complete application.

4. The responsible official will normally respond to a request for early notice within 10 days. The threshold determination will normally be made within 15 days of receipt of the changed or clarified proposal, environmental checklist and/or permit application. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article IV. Categorical Exemptions

18.04.080 Categorical exemptions – Adoption by reference.

A. The city adopts the following rules for categorical exemption of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-305 Categorical exemptions.

197-11-800 Categorical exemptions; except as noted in subsection B of this section.

197-11-880 Emergencies.

197-11-890 Petitioning DOE to change exemptions.

B. The city establishes the following raised exemption levels for minor new construction under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c):

1. Construction or location of up to nine single-family residential dwelling units and up to eight multifamily residential dwelling units (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(i) and (ii)).

2. The construction of a barn, loafing shed, farm equipment storage building, produce storage or packing structure, or similar agricultural structure, covering up to 20,000 square feet and to be used only by the property owner or his or her agent in the conduct of farming the property. This exemption shall not apply to feed lots (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iii)).

3. Construction of an office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage building, up to 12,000 square feet of gross floor area and associated parking facilities designed for up to 50 automobiles (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(iv)).

4. Any fill or excavation of up to 1,000 cubic yards throughout the lifetime of the fill or excavation and any excavation, fill, or grading necessary for an exempt project listed in subsection (1), (2), (3) or (4) of this section; provided, that the grading will not take place within shoreline jurisdiction or above 650 feet in elevation (WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(v)).

5. Any fill or excavation of up to 100 cubic yards throughout the lifetime of the fill or excavation and any excavation, fill, or grading necessary for an exempt project listed in subsection (B)(1), (2), (3) or (4) of this section, if the any grading will take place within shoreline jurisdiction or above 650 feet in elevation.

C. Whenever the city establishes new exempt levels under this section, it shall send them to the Department of Ecology, Headquarters Office, Olympia, Washington, 98504 under WAC 197-11-800(1)(c). [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.090 Categorical exemptions – Determination.

A. When the city receives an application for a license, permit, or, in the case of governmental proposals, a department initiates a proposal, the responsible official shall determine whether the license and/or the proposal is exempt from environmental review under this chapter. The determination that a proposal is exempt shall be final and not subject to administrative appeal. If a proposal is exempt, none of the procedural requirements of this chapter shall apply to the proposal.

B. In determining whether or not a proposal is exempt, responsible official shall make certain proposal is properly defined and shall identify governmental license or permit required. If proposal includes exempt and nonexempt actions, responsible official shall determine lead agency even if license application triggering consideration is exempt.

C. If proposal includes both exempt and nonexempt actions, city may authorize exempt actions prior to compliance with procedural requirements of this chapter, except:

1. The city shall not give authorization for:

a. Any nonexempt action;

b. Any action that would have an adverse environmental impact; or

c. Any action that would limit the choice of reasonable alternatives;

2. The city may withhold approval of any permit, application or proposal, the basis of which is an exempt action that would lead to modification of the physical environment, when such modification would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved; and

3. The city may withhold approval of any permit, application or proposal, the basis of which is an exempt action that would lead to substantial financial expenditures by a private applicant when the expenditures would serve no purpose if the nonexempt actions were not approved.

4. A planned action as defined in RCW 43.21C.031(2) does not require a threshold determination or the preparation of an environmental impact statement under this chapter, but is subject to environmental review and mitigation as provided in this chapter. [Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.100 Determination – Review at conceptual stage.

A. Preapplication conferences, as provided in WRMC 14.02.010, shall also address environmental issues to familiarize the applicant with the city’s SEPA regulations, process, policies and objectives.

B. If the city’s only action on a proposal is a decision on a building permit or other license that requires detailed project plans and specifications, the applicant may request in writing that the city conduct environmental review prior to submission of the detailed plans and specifications.

C. In addition to environmental documents an applicant shall submit the following information for early environmental review:

1. A copy of any permit or license application; and

2. Other information as the responsible official determines. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article V. Threshold Determinations

18.04.110 Threshold determination – Environmental checklist.

A. A completed environmental checklist shall be filed at the same time as an application for a permit, license, certificate or other approval not exempted by this chapter. The checklist shall be the form of WAC 197-11-960 with such additions that may be required by the responsible official in accordance with WAC 197-11-906(4).

B. A checklist is not needed if the city and the applicant agree an EIS is required, SEPA compliance has been completed, or SEPA compliance has been initiated by another agency or adoption of a previous document.

C. For private proposals, applicant is required to complete the environmental checklist. The city may provide assistance as necessary. For city proposals, the department initiating the proposal shall complete the environmental checklist for that proposal.

D. The city may decide to complete all or part of the environmental checklist for a private proposal, if any of the following occurs:

1. City has technical information on a question(s) unavailable to private applicant;

2. The applicant has provided inaccurate information on previous proposals or on proposals currently under consideration.

E. The applicant shall pay to the city the actual costs of providing information under subsection (D)(2) of this section.

F. For projects submitted as planned actions under WAC 197-11-164, the city shall use its existing environmental checklist form or may modify the environmental checklist form as provided in WAC 197-11-315. The modified environmental checklist form may be prepared and adopted along with or as part of a planned action ordinance; or developed after the ordinance is adopted. In either case, a proposed modified environmental checklist form must be sent to the Department of Ecology to allow at least a 30-day review prior to use. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.120 Completed environmental checklist defined.

A. Environmental checklist is deemed complete when the following information is provided:

1. All information as requested in the checklist is provided, including complete responses to all questions in the checklist.

2. All plans and illustrations as required per the applicable city code are submitted with the environmental checklist.

3. The required number of copies of the checklist and associated plans and illustrations are submitted, as per the applicable city code.

4. Checklist is properly signed and dated.

5. All applicable fees as established in the city’s fee schedule are paid.

B. Incomplete or inaccurate responses to questions within the checklist shall be grounds for reserving a threshold determination on a proposal including scheduling of any public hearings as may be required, until such time as the information is provided by the applicant. Any period during which an applicant has been requested by the city to correct plans, perform required studies or provide additional required information shall not be included in the project permit processing time.

C. In accordance with WAC 197-11-315(7), electronic submittals of the checklist, including electronic signature of Part C of the checklist, are accepted by the city. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.130 Threshold determinations.

A. The responsible official may issue a determination of nonsignificance (DNS) based on conditions attached to the proposal by the responsible official or on changes to, or clarifications of, the proposal made by the applicant.

B. An applicant may request in writing early notice of whether a determination of significance (DS) is likely under WAC 197-11-350. The request must:

1. Follow submission of a permit application and environmental checklist for a nonexempt proposal for which the department is lead agency; and

2. Precede the city’s actual threshold determination for the proposal.

C. The responsible official’s response to the request for early notice shall:

1. Be written and provided within 15 working days;

2. State whether the city currently considers issuance of a DS likely and, if so, indicate the general or specific areas of concern that are leading the city to consider a DS; and

3. State that the applicant may change or clarify the proposal to mitigate the indicated impacts, and may revise the environmental checklist and/or permit application as necessary to reflect the changes or clarifications.

D. As much as possible, the city should assist the applicant with identification of impacts to the extent necessary to formulate mitigation measures.

E. When an applicant submits a changed or clarified proposal, along with a revised environmental checklist, the city shall base its threshold determination on the changed or clarified proposal.

1. If the city indicated specific mitigation measures in its response to the request for early notice, and the applicant changed or clarified the proposal to include those specific mitigation measures, the city shall issue and circulate a DNS under WAC 197-11-340(2).

2. If the city indicated areas of concern, but did not indicate specific mitigation measures that would allow it to issue a DNS, the city shall make the threshold determination by issuing a DNS or DS as appropriate.

3. The applicant’s proposed mitigation measures, clarifications, changes or conditions must be in writing and must be specific. For example, proposals to “control noise” or “prevent stormwater runoff” are inadequate, whereas proposals to “muffle machinery to X decibel” or “construct 200-foot stormwater retention pond at Y location” are adequate.

4. Mitigation measures which justify issuance of a mitigated DNS may be incorporated in the DNS by reference to agency staff reports, studies or other documents.

E. The city shall not act upon a proposal for which a mitigated DNS has been issued for 14 days after the date of issuance for a comment period; provided, that the requirements of this section shall not apply to a DNS issued pursuant to the optional DNS process described in WRMC 18.04.140.

F. Any nonexempt permit or proposal may be conditioned or denied under SEPA, subject to the limitations in WAC 197-11-660.

G. Mitigation measures incorporated in the mitigated DNS shall be deemed conditions of approval of the permit decision and may be enforced in the same manner as any term or condition of the permit or enforced in any matter specifically prescribed by the city.

H. If the city’s tentative decision on a permit or approval does not include mitigation measures that were incorporated in a mitigated DNS for the proposal, the city should evaluate the threshold determination to assure consistency with WAC 197-11-340(3)(a) relating to the withdrawal of a DNS.

I. The city’s written response under subsection C of this section shall not be construed as a determination of significance. In addition, preliminary discussion of clarification or changes to a proposal, as opposed to a written request for early notice, shall not bind the city to consider the clarifications or changes in its threshold determination. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.140 Optional DNS process.

A. If responsible official has a reasonable basis for determining that significant adverse environmental impacts are unlikely, or that mitigation measures have been identified that will reduce impacts to a nonsignificant level, the responsible official may elect to use the single integrated comment period set forth in this section. If this process is used, a second comment period will typically not be required when the DNS is issued.

B. If the optional process set forth in this section is used, the responsible official shall:

1. State on the first page of the notice of application that it expects to issue a DNS for the proposal, and that:

a. The optional DNS process is being used;

b. This may be the only opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal;

c. The proposal may include mitigation measures under applicable codes, and the project review process may incorporate or require mitigation measures regardless of whether an EIS is prepared; and

d. A copy of the subsequent threshold determination for the specific proposal may be obtained upon request (in addition, the city may maintain a general mailing list for threshold determination distribution);

2. List in the notice of application the conditions being considered to mitigate environmental impacts, if a mitigated DNS is expected;

3. Comply with the requirements for a notice of application and public notice in WRMC 14.03.010; and

4. Send the notice of application and environmental checklist to:

a. Agencies with jurisdiction, the Department of Ecology, affected tribes, and each local agency or political subdivision whose public services would be changed as a result of implementation of the proposal; and

b. Anyone requesting a copy of the environmental checklist for the specific proposal (in addition, the city may maintain a general mailing list for checklist distribution).

C. If the responsible official indicates on the notice of application that a DNS is likely, an agency with jurisdiction may assume lead agency status during the comment period on the notice of application in accordance with WRMC 18.04.050 and WAC 197-11-948.

D. The responsible official shall consider timely comments on the notice of application and either:

1. Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with no comment period using the procedures in subsection E of this section;

2. Issue a DNS or mitigated DNS with a comment period using the procedures in subsection E of this section, if the responsible official determines a comment period is necessary;

3. Issue a DS; or

4. Require additional information or studies prior to making a threshold determination.

E. If a DNS or mitigated DNS is issued under subsection (D)(1) or (D)(2) of this section, the responsible official shall send a copy of the DNS or mitigated DNS to the Department of Ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, those who commented, and anyone requesting a copy. A copy of the environmental checklist need not be recirculated. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.150 Consistency.

The city’s environmental review shall include a determination of the proposal’s consistency with existing development regulations and the comprehensive plan. The consistency review shall determine whether the impacts of the proposal have been addressed in development regulations or the comprehensive plan. The planning decisions made in these documents shall not be reanalyzed in the environmental review of individual project proposals, nor will additional studies or mitigation be required if existing regulations and documents have adequately addressed the proposal’s probable adverse impacts. The consistency determination described herein shall take place in conjunction with the consistency determination described in Chapter 14.04 WRMC. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article VI. Environmental Impact Statement

18.04.160 Environmental impact statement (EIS) – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference as supplemented by this chapter:

WAC

197-11-400 Purpose of EIS.

197-11-402 General requirements.

197-11-405 EIS types.

197-11-406 EIS timing.

197-11-408 Scoping.

197-11-410 Expanded scoping.

197-11-420 EIS preparation.

197-11-425 Style and size.

197-11-430 Format.

197-11-435 Cover letter or memo.

197-11-440 EIS contents.

197-11-442 Contents of EIS on nonproject proposals.

197-11-443 EIS contents when prior nonproject EIS.

197-11-444 Elements of the environment.

197-11-448 Relationship of EIS to other considerations.

197-11-450 Cost-benefit analysis.

197-11-455 Issuance of DEIS.

197-11-460 Issuance of FEIS.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.170 EIS – Preparation.

A. Responsible Official’s Responsibilities. Preparation of draft and final EISs and SEISs shall be under the direction of the responsible official. Before the city issues an EIS or SEIS, the responsible official shall be satisfied that it complies with this chapter and Chapter 197-11 WAC.

B. The DEIS and FEIS or draft and final SEIS shall be prepared by city staff, the applicant, or by a consultant selected by the city or the applicant. If the responsible official requires an EIS for a proposal and determines that someone other than the city/county will prepare the EIS, the responsible official shall notify the applicant immediately after completion of the threshold determination. The responsible official shall also notify the applicant of the city’s procedure for EIS preparation, including approval of the DEIS and FEIS prior to distribution.

C. Requirement for Additional Information. The city may require an applicant to provide additional information which the city does not possess, including information which must be obtained by specific investigations. This provision is not intended to expand or limit an applicant’s other obligations under WAC 197-11-100, or other provisions of regulation, statute or ordinance. An applicant shall not be required to produce information under this provision which is not specifically required by this chapter, nor is the applicant relieved of the duty to supply any other information required by statute, regulation or ordinance.

D. Fees.

1. For the purpose of reimbursing the city for necessary costs and expenses relating to its compliance with the SEPA rules and this chapter in connection with private projects, the following schedule of fees is established (in addition to the fees in the city’s master fee schedule):

a. For a threshold determination which requires information in addition to that contained in or accompanying the environmental checklist, a fee in an amount equal to the actual costs and expenses incurred by the city in conducting any studies or investigations necessary to provide such information;

b. For all private projects requiring an EIS for which the city is the lead agency and for which the responsible official determines that the EIS shall be prepared by the employees of the city, or that the city will contract directly with a consultant or consultants for the preparation of an EIS, a fee in an amount equal to the actual costs and expenses incurred by the city in preparing the EIS. Such fee shall also apply when the city determines that the applicant may prepare the EIS, and the responsible official determines that substantial revisions or reassessing of impacts must be performed by employees of the city to ensure compliance with the provisions of the SEPA guidelines and this chapter.

2. If the responsible official determines that an EIS is required, and that the EIS shall be prepared by employees of the city or by a consultant or consultants retained by the city, or that the applicant-prepared EIS shall be substantially rewritten by employees of the city, the private applicant shall be advised by the responsible official of the estimated costs and expenses of preparing or rewriting the EIS prior to actual preparation or rewriting, and the private applicant shall post a bond or otherwise insure payment of such costs and expenses. A consultant or consultants may be recommended by the applicant. The final decision to hire a consultant or consultants shall be made by the city council.

3. All fees owed the city under this section shall be paid in full by the private applicant prior to final action by the city on the private project. Any fee owed the city under this subsection D shall be paid by the private applicant prior to the initiation of actual preparation of an EIS (if required) or actual rewriting of an applicant-prepared EIS by the city or its consultant(s). For all EISs involving multiple applicants, the cost of preparation shall be divided among the applicants according to the nature, amount and type of work to be performed. The city shall ask the EIS consultant to estimate the costs related to the portion of the EIS associated with each application. The city shall make the final decision on the costs to be billed each applicant, regardless of whether the EIS is prepared by a consultant or the city. If a private applicant disputes the amount of the fee, the fee may be paid under protest and without prejudice to the applicant’s right to file a claim and bring an action to recover the fee. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.180 Time for preparation of EIS.

The time required to prepare an environmental impact statement (EIS) associated with a development application shall be agreed to by the director and applicant in writing. Unless otherwise agreed to by the applicant, a final environmental impact statement shall be issued by the director within one year following the issuance of a determination of significance for the proposal, unless the applicant or the applicant’s EIS consultant advises that a longer time period is necessary. In that case, the additional time shall be that recommended by the applicant or consultant, not to exceed an additional year. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.190 EIS – Commenting – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-500 Purpose of this part.

197-11-502 Inviting comment.

197-11-504 Availability and cost of environmental documents.

197-11-508 SEPA register.

197-11-510 Public notice.

197-11-535 Public hearings and meetings.

197-11-545 Effect of no comment.

197-11-550 Specificity of comments.

197-11-560 FEIS response to comments.

197-11-570 Consulted agency costs to assist lead agency.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article VII. Public Notice and Commenting

18.04.200 Public notice.

Whenever the city issues a threshold determination, or EIS requiring public notice, the city shall give public notice of the determination or the availability of the environmental documents and whether any public hearing will be held as follows:

A. Threshold Determination Notice. Public notice will be given on the following situations:

1. DNS involving another agency with jurisdiction;

2. DNS involving demolition of any structure or facility not exempted by WAC 197-11-800(2)(f), 197-11-800(2)(g) or 197-11-880;

3. DNS involving issuance of clearing or grading permits not exempted under Chapter 197-11 WAC, Part Nine, Categorical Exemptions;

4. DNS under WAC 197-11-350(2), Early Notice;

5. DNS under WAC 197-11-350(3), Mitigated DNS;

6. DNS under WAC 197-11-360(4), change from DS to DNS;

7. DS for scoping purposes;

8. Availability of a DEIS.

B. Type of Notice. Under subsection A of this section, notice will be given as follows:

1. The notice will be send to the Department of Ecology for inclusion on the department’s SEPA register website;

2. Posting on the official city website, and at the official posting places set forth pursuant to WRMC 1.12.010.

C. Public Hearing. Whenever a public hearing is held on a SEPA action, notice shall be given. Such notice shall precede the hearing by at least 15 days.

D. Type of Notice. Under subsection C of this section, notice will be given as follows:

1. For hearings involving Type VII applications, as set forth in WRMC 14.01.030:

a. The notice will be sent to the Department of Ecology for inclusion on the Department’s SEPA register website;

b. Posting on the official city website, or publication in the official newspaper of the city; and

c. Notifying the news media.

2. For hearings on other applications:

a. The notice will be sent to the Department of Ecology for inclusion on the Department’s SEPA register website; and

b. Posting on or near the property; and

c. Posting on the official city website, or at the official posting places set forth pursuant to WRMC 1.12.010; and

d. Mailing to property owners within 600 feet for site-specific proposals. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.210 Designation of responsible official to perform consulted agency responsibilities.

The city adopts by reference WAC 197-11-910, as now existing or hereafter amended, as supplemented in this chapter:

A. The responsible official shall be responsible for preparation of written documents for the city in response to a consultation request prior to a threshold determination, participation in scoping and reviewing of a draft EIS.

B. The responsible official shall be responsible for the city’s compliance with WAC 197-11-550 and 197-11-912 whenever the city is a consulted agency and is authorized to develop operating procedures that will ensure that responses to consultation requests are prepared in a timely fashion and include data from all appropriate departments of the city.

C. The responsible official shall be responsible for reviewing all SEPA determinations made by Benton County. If it is the decision by the responsible official that any such SEPA determination substantially impacts the interests of the city, a response shall be forwarded to Benton County on behalf of the city. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.220 Using existing environmental documents – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference:

WAC

197-11-600 When to use existing environmental documents.

197-11-610 Use of NEPA documents.

197-11-620 Supplemental environmental impact statements.

197-11-625 Addenda – Procedures.

197-11-630 Adoption – Procedures.

197-11-635 Incorporation by reference – Procedures.

197-11-640 Combining documents.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.230 SEPA and agency decisions – Adoption by reference.

City adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference:

WAC

197-11-650 Purpose of this part.

197-11-655 Implementation.

197-11-660 Substantive authority and mitigation.

197-11-680 Appeals.

197-11-700 Definitions.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.240 SEPA decisions.

For nonexempt proposals, the DNS or EIS for the proposal shall accompany the city staff’s recommendation. If a final EIS is or becomes available, it shall be substituted for the draft. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.250 SEPA policies.

A. The policies and goals set forth in this chapter are supplementary to the city’s existing authority.

B. The city adopts by reference the policies in the following city codes, ordinances, resolutions and plans, as now existing or hereinafter amended, as a basis for the exercise of substantive authority in the conditioning or denying of proposals:

1. Chapter 43.21C RCW, State Environmental Policy Act.

2. WRMC Title 5, Business Taxes, Licenses and Regulations.

3. WRMC Title 6, Animals.

4. WRMC Title 8, Health and Safety.

5. WRMC Title 10, Vehicles and Traffic.

6. WRMC Title 12, Streets, Sidewalks and Public Places.

7. WRMC Title 13, Public Services – Water, Sewer, Irrigation and Stormwater.

8. WRMC Title 15, Buildings and Construction.

9. WRMC Title 16, Division of Land.

10. WRMC Title 17, Zoning.

11. Chapter 18.12 WRMC, Flood Control.

12. Chapter 18.16 WRMC, Flood Damage Prevention.

13. Chapter 18.20 WRMC, Sensitive Areas.

14. Chapter 18.25 WRMC, Critical Areas.

15. WRMC Title 19, Signs.

16. WRMC Title 20, Telecommunications.

17. The city of West Richland comprehensive plan, including the city’s shoreline master program and the park plan.

18. The city’s six-year transportation improvement program.

19. The city’s comprehensive water plan.

20. The city’s comprehensive sewer plan.

21. City of West Richland public works standards.

22. City of West Richland stormwater management policies necessary to comply with NPDES Phase 2 requirements. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article VIII. Appeals

18.04.260 Appeals.

A. Appealable Decisions.

1. Only the following decisions may be administratively appealed under this chapter:

a. Final threshold determination;

b. Mitigation or failure to mitigate in the SEPA decision;

c. Final EIS; and

d. Project denials.

2. If the city does not provide for a hearing or appeal on the underlying action/permit (see WRMC 14.01.030), there shall not be a SEPA administrative appeal option. In such case, the only option for appeal is through the judicial process.

B. Notice of Decision.

1. In the notice of decision issued by the city pursuant to WRMC 14.05.090 and for every decision for which an administrative appeal is available in this section, the SEPA responsible official shall give official notice of the date and place for commencing an appeal. The notice shall include:

a. Notice that the SEPA determination must be appealed within the time limit set by statute or ordinance for appealing the underlying governmental action;

b. The time limit for commencing the appeal of the underlying governmental action and SEPA determination, and the statute or ordinance establishing the time limit;

c. Where the appeal may be filed.

2. Written notice shall be provided to the applicant, all parties to any administrative appeal and all persons who have requested notice of decisions concerning the project. Such notice may be appended to the permit, the decision documents, the SEPA compliance documents or may be printed separately.

C. Timing of SEPA Administrative Appeals. Any administrative appeal shall take place prior to the city’s final decision on a proposed action. However, the SEPA appeal hearing may be consolidated with any other hearing on the underlying permit or action.

D. Number of Appeals. Only one administrative appeal to the city is allowed of the decisions listed in subsection A of this section; therefore, the planning commission’s decision on a SEPA appeal cannot be heard by the city council.

E. Consolidated Appeals. If the underlying action/permit requires a hearing, any SEPA appeal shall be consolidated with the hearing or appeal of the underlying action/permit into one simultaneous hearing, with the exception of the following:

1. An appeal of a determination of significance (DS);

2. An appeal of a procedural determination made by the city when the city is a project proponent, or is funding a project, and chooses to conduct its review under SEPA, including any appeals of its procedural determinations, prior to submitting an application for a project permit. Subsequent appeals of substantive determinations by an agency with jurisdiction over the proposed project shall be allowed under the SEPA appeal procedures of the agency with jurisdiction;

3. An appeal of a procedural determination made by the city on a nonproject action; and

4. An appeal to the city council under RCW 43.21C.060.

F. Timing of Appeal.

1. For SEPA determinations that provide for an administrative appeal, the administrative appeal shall be filed within 14 days after notice of the final determination when the determination is issued prior to the decision on the project action, or within 21 days if the SEPA determination is issued in conjunction with the decision on the project action.

G. Consideration of SEPA Responsible Official’s Decision. Procedural determinations made by the SEPA responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight in an appeal.

H. Administrative Record. An administrative record of the appeal must be provided, and the record shall consist of the following:

1. Findings and conclusions;

2. Testimony under oath; and

3. A recorded or written transcript. (The city may require that the appellant provide an electronic transcript.)

I. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. The city’s administrative appeal procedure must be used before anyone may initiate judicial review of any SEPA issue for which the city allows an appeal in this section.

J. Content of Appeal. Every appeal must be in writing, and must include the following:

1. The applicable appeal fee, as established by resolution of the city council;

2. Appellant’s name, address and phone number;

3. A statement describing the appellant’s standing, or why the appellant believes that he or she is aggrieved by the decision appealed from;

4. Identification of the application and decision which is the subject of the appeal;

5. Appellant’s statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based with specific references to the facts in the record;

6. The specific relief sought;

7. A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the content to be true, followed by the appellant’s signature.

K. Timeliness of Appeals. On receipt of a written notice of appeal, the SEPA responsible official shall forward the appeal to the planning commission, who shall determine whether the appeal is timely prior to conducting the appeal hearing or consolidated open record hearing on an underlying project permit. A written decision will be issued if the appeal is untimely and the appeal will not proceed.

L. SEPA Appeals to the Planning Commission.

1. Jurisdiction. All SEPA appeals relating to project permit applications that are decided by the planning commission, or that require a recommendation from the planning commission to the city council, shall be heard by the planning commission. The appeal of a DNS or MDNS shall be held in conjunction with the hearing on the underlying land use action.

2. Hearing. The planning commission shall hold an open record public hearing on the appeal, as provided in Chapter 14.05 WRMC.

3. Date for Issuance of Decision. The planning commission shall issue a decision on the appeal within the time period set forth in WRMC 14.05.080, unless a longer period is agreed to in writing by the applicant.

4. Appeals of Planning Commission’s Decision. Planning commission’s decision on timeliness of an appeal and any other appeals allowed under this subsection shall be the final decision of the city. The decision and/or notice of decision shall state that any appeal of the final decision shall be filed in Benton County superior court (pursuant to Chapter 36.70C RCW), or the shorelines hearings board.

M. City Council Appeals.

1. Jurisdiction. The city council shall hear all SEPA appeals relating to legislative actions and applications, as well as all SEPA appeals relating to appealable project permit applications that are decided by the community development director (Type II permits outlined in WRMC Title 14).

2. Hearing. The city council shall hold an open record hearing on the appeal, as provided in Chapter 14.05 WRMC.

3. Record on Appeal. There are no restrictions on the evidence and testimony received by the council for an open record appeal. The city council shall follow the requirements of Chapter 14.06 WRMC for closed record appeals.

4. Appeals of City Council’s Decision. The city council’s decision on the timeliness of an appeal within its jurisdiction and any other appeals allowed under this subsection within its jurisdiction shall be the final decision of the city. The city council’s decision and/or notice of decision shall state that any appeal of the final decision may be filed in Benton County superior court within 21 days of issuance to the Growth Management Hearings Board.

N. Judicial Appeals.

1. When SEPA applies to a decision, any judicial appeal of that decision potentially involves both those issues pertaining to SEPA and those which do not. This section and RCW 43.21C.075 establish the time limits for raising SEPA issues, but existing statutes of limitation control the appeal of non-SEPA issues.

2. Appeals of the city’s final decision shall be filed in superior court, but appellants must follow RCW 43.21C.075(6)(c), which provides that judicial review under Chapter 43.21C RCW shall without exception be of the governmental action together with its accompanying environmental determinations, which contemplates a single lawsuit. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.270 Notice – Statute of limitations.

A. City, applicant, or proponent of an action may publish notice of action pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080 for any action.

B. The form of the notice shall be substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-990. The notice shall be published by the city clerk or county auditor, applicant or proponent pursuant to RCW 43.21C.080. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.280 Definitions – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-700 Definitions.

197-11-702 Act.

197-11-704 Action.

197-11-706 Addendum.

197-11-708 Adoption.

197-11-710 Affected tribe.

197-11-712 Affecting.

197-11-714 Agency.

197-11-716 Applicant.

197-11-718 Built environment.

197-11-720 Categorical exemption.

197-11-721 Closed record appeal.

197-11-722 Consolidated appeal.

197-11-724 Consulted agency.

197-11-726 Cost-benefit analysis.

197-11-728 County/city.

197-11-730 Decision maker.

197-11-732 Department.

197-11-734 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-736 Determination of significance (DS).

197-11-738 EIS.

197-11-740 Environment.

197-11-742 Environmental checklist.

197-11-744 Environmental document.

197-11-746 Environmental review.

197-11-750 Expanded scoping.

197-11-752 Impacts.

197-11-754 Incorporation by reference.

197-11-756 Lands covered by water.

197-11-758 Lead agency.

197-11-760 License.

197-11-762 Local agency.

197-11-764 Major action.

197-11-766 Mitigated DNS.

197-11-768 Mitigation.

197-11-770 Natural environment.

197-11-772 NEPA.

197-11-774 Nonproject.

197-11-775 Open record hearing.

197-11-776 Phased review.

197-11-778 Preparation.

197-11-780 Private project.

197-11-782 Probable.

197-11-784 Proposal.

197-11-786 Reasonable alternative.

197-11-788 Responsible official.

197-11-790 SEPA.

197-11-792 Scope.

197-11-793 Scoping.

197-11-794 Significant.

197-11-796 State agency.

197-11-797 Threshold determination.

197-11-799 Underlying governmental action.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.290 Compliance with SEPA – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference, as supplemented in this chapter:

WAC

197-11-900 Purpose of this part.

197-11-902 Agency SEPA policies.

197-11-908 Critical areas.

197-11-916 Application to ongoing actions.

197-11-920 Agencies with environmental expertise.

197-11-922 Lead agency rules.

197-11-924 Determining the lead agency.

197-11-926 Lead agency for governmental proposals.

197-11-928 Lead agency for public and private proposals.

197-11-930 Lead agency for private projects with one agency with jurisdiction.

197-11-932 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one agency, when one of the agencies is a county/city.

197-11-934 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from a local agency, not a county/city, and one or more state agencies.

197-11-936 Lead agency for private projects requiring licenses from more than one state agency.

197-11-938 Lead agencies for specific proposals.

197-11-940 Transfer of lead agency status to a state agency.

197-11-942 Agreements on lead agency status.

197-11-944 Agreements on division of lead agency duties.

197-11-946 DOE resolution of lead agency disputes.

197-11-948 Assumption of lead agency status.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Article IX. Fees and Forms

18.04.300 Fees.

The city shall require fees as set by city council in the master fee schedule for its activities in accordance with the provisions of this chapter. [Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

18.04.310 Forms – Adoption by reference.

The city adopts the following forms and sections of Chapter 197-11 WAC, as now existing or hereinafter amended, by reference:

WAC

197-11-960 Environmental checklist.

197-11-965 Adoption notice.

197-11-970 Determination of nonsignificance (DNS).

197-11-980 Determination of significance and scoping notice (DS).

197-11-985 Notice of assumption of lead agency status.

[Ord. 30-19 § 1 (Att. B), 2019; Ord. 41-07 § 1, 2007].

Code reviser’s note: Ord. 30-19 amended Ch. 18.04 but inadvertently omitted WRMC 18.04.060 and 18.04.090. Both sections have been retained per the city’s intent. In addition, WRMC 18.04.060 was amended for consistency with the amendments of Ord. 30-19.